h a l f b a k e r yIf you need to ask, you can't afford it.
add, search, annotate, link, view, overview, recent, by name, random
news, help, about, links, report a problem
browse anonymously,
or get an account
and write.
register,
|
|
|
Gasoline has become expensive this year. Natural gas, not so much. Electricity rates are also about the same.
I propose that natural gas could be reacted with itself (condensed?) to form longer chain alkanes which could be burnt as gasoline. Because natural gas is easy to transport, and the system
exists, it would make sense for this to be decentralized - maybe at gas stations. Such a reaction would consume (electrical) power but I assert that the end product will be cheaper than gasoline. Or will soon be cheaper than gasoline.
We've had one of these for ages.
http://www.teara.go...urces/Standard/4/en
"The Motunui synthetic petrol plant was the first (and only) one of its type in the world. It converted gas to methanol (methyl alcohol), then to synthetic petrol." [Texticle, May 25 2008]
Bond energies
http://www.cem.msu....rgPage/bndenrgy.htm
The more carbons in the alkane, the easier it is to strip off a hydrogen. [bungston, May 31 2008]
Please log in.
If you're not logged in,
you can see what this page
looks like, but you will
not be able to add anything.
Annotation:
|
| |
Or just burn natural gas and avoid petroleum completely? |
|
| |
So, im assuming you mean have a tank of highly pressurized natural gas in your car, run it through a special carb and power your car with it?
Its widely baked. Although it is known for being considerably less powerful than petrol as well as burning extremely hot and warping cylinder heads. |
|
| |
It's possible to convert, without too much difficulty, a standard diesel engine to run on LNG, much as a gasoline engine can run on propane. The energy an complexity of converting methane to longer-chain molecules requires high pressure, high temperature plant, and catalysts. It can be done on an industrial scale, like a refinery, but since metane is a perfectly good fuel in itself, why ? |
|
| |
More rational is to oxidise it to Mthanol, which can be blended in to bulk up existing gasoline with no retuning; or you can run on pure methanol, an excellent, cool-burning fuel for ICE's, already demonstrated in light aircraft. Alternatively, how about Dimethyl Ether ? |
|
| |
If you're going to the trouble to build a plant capable of converting Mthane all the way to Octane, better to go for Fischer-Tropsch, or a coal hydrogenation plant. Ask SASOL ..... |
|
| |
[+] for the concept of using a little energy to link molecules together to improve density and make them easier to transport. |
|
| |
Concept is baked on an industrial scale (see link). |
|
| |
Wow I had no idea that LNG is similar enough to diesel fuel to be converted. Those diesel engines sure are versatile. |
|
| |
the cost of converting diesel engine to CNG engine is approximately 4 times compared to converting gasoline engine to CNG engine. |
|
| |
Baked, oil from coal. The intermediate step includes deriving the natural gasses from the coal. Possibly not widely known to exist. Some of the bigger oil from coal companies ship natural gas straight in to join the process "halfway". |
|
| |
But you can buy shares in the companies that do this, to prove you were one step ahead of the game. |
|
| |
And yes, it is cheaper than distilling gasoline (petroleums) from "heavier" crudes. Lots of useful by-products too. |
|
| |
I googled and googled trying to find the kj/mol for the methane + methane reaction. It seems that there should be a hydrogen byproduct too. |
|
| |
This chemistry might be going on in the deep earth. If so it should happen without oxygen - no methanol intermediate. It would require somewhere to put the hydrogen but I wonder if iron oxide would work too. It would be inline with the abiogenic methane theories of Thomas Gold. I apologize that I have neither the chemistry nor google powers to crunch the energetics on this, and I humbly invite anyone who does to do so. I predict that the following will be energetically favorable: |
|
| |
CH4+CH4 -> C2H6 (ethane) + H2 -> H2 + SO4 -> H2S + H2O. Starts with methane and sulfate, ends with ethane, H2S and water. |
|
| |
I predict that sticking a methane onto a longer alkane will be more energetically favorable than sticking 2 methanes together, thus favoring growth of long alkanes. |
|
| |
These deep bugs would have the advantage of pressure, but would probably have some nifty catalysts instead of requiring high temperature. |
|
| |
I'd hazard the guess that most "deep bugs" were near hot spots, and therefore catalysts are not likely to be necessary. |
|
| |
Interesting guy that Thomas... Did you know that Carbonaceous Chrondites can be burnt just like coal? |
|
| |